Talk:Chloe Sullivan (Smallville)
Future Thought I'd address certain facts about her future. First, her living in Singapore. In "Finale, Part II", she tucks her son in for the night. After she's done that, she calls Lois in Metropolis, where it's still in the middle of the day (14:30, according to a big clock, that Lois passes). This shows that Chloe is another time zone. As it was already bed-time for the kid, it can't have been within the continental United States, but another country (while she was established to be living in Star City in 2011). Lois is shown having received a package from Chloe, that gives her current residence as Singapore. Second, we have a more controversial topic: her marital status. I reached out to a few of the writers on Twitter. Got a reply from Al Septien, but he couldn't remember. However, the episode contains clues to it. In 2018, we're shown Chloe's left hand. On it, she's wearing both a wedding band and an engagement ring (the latter being an odd item, as she and Oliver were never engaged). However, in absolutely no 2011 scene, is she wearing a wedding ring (nor is Oliver). Several shots are staged, so that you can clearly see her left hand. The video in "Fortune" shows that Chloe and Oliver didn't get rings. Clark got some for them, but Oliver rejected them. In "Finale, Part I", Oliver remarks: "All I really need is a marriage license". After having been married for a while, they still haven't gotten rings. Then we jump seven years into the future, where Chloe's shown to be wearing both a wedding band and an engagement ring. Oliver doesn't appear or is even mentioned in 2018 (the only nod is a brief show of a bow and arrows, but not the ones Oliver's been shown using. The shot connects Jonathan Queen with Oliver. Telling the viewers: "yes, this is Oliver's kid"). There are no photos of Chloe and Oliver together. Let's go over the possibilities of why she's wearing rings in 2018, when neither she or her husband wears them in 2011 (nor in the season 11 comic). Sometimes, married actors forget to remove their own wedding rings (resulting in the sudden appearance of a wedding ring, when the character's not supposed to have one). However, Allison Mack didn't get married until 2017. So, it can't be her real one. Continuity screw-up? That would more be the case, if she wasn't wearing one, in one scene, while she's shown wearing them in all the others (sometimes changing between shots). Not in only the scene set seven years later, while she's shown ring-less in all the previous ones. They're suggesting that Chloe got a ring from Oliver later? Okay, that's just weird. We're talking about real-world filmmaking (or TV making) here. This would then suggest that someone in the writers' room suggested including a subplot of them not having rings yet. Someone actually stood up and said: "You know what would be a good idea? Have Chloe only wear rings in 2018. It'll show that she and Oliver got rings later on". The two-part finale doesn't make it a big deal (or a deal at all), that they don't have rings. Chloe never says: "We probably should get rings eventually". Then we've got the possibility of them having gotten divorced. This would explain the absence of Oliver in 2018. Why Chloe's wearing both a wedding band and an engagement ring. Why she doesn't live in Star City anymore. It's been my experience that when there's a jump in time (in films and TV shows) and a woman suddenly wears a wedding ring. It's the filmmakers way of telling you: "she's gotten married, since we last saw her". In this case, she was already married. But she and her husband didn't do rings, because "all I really need is a marriage license". She's wearing an engagement ring, despite not having been engaged to Oliver (a fact that they even bring up in the two-parter). The evidence points towards an eventual dissolution of their union. Afterwards, she got engaged to someone else, married and moved to Singapore.KylieMfever (talk) 14:52, November 26, 2018 (UTC) :The wedding ring thing is speculation any way you slice it. For the Singapore thing, just that package was enough. Time stamp, for those that want to verify? --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 15:27, November 26, 2018 (UTC) ::About 1:17:43 (no idea what the time stamp would be for streaming, where the two-parter might be split into two).KylieMfever (talk) 16:15, November 26, 2018 (UTC)